Some people think that it's their fault for being poor because they don't have a college degree. So they either continue to suffer or try to get some degree and end up either in debt, with a job, or no debt but still unemployed. This is partly because everyone 'agrees' that the US needs MORE EDUCATION to win at the GDP game.

Other people think that if the economy is strong (as measured by GDP and/or corporate profits), this will somehow translate into jobs. People who think this often already have a job so they aren't affected by the lack of logic and just listen to whatever some authoritative-sounding expert tells them.

counterargument: the years of the great depression, the reality of high unemployment years after the financial crisis... really not sure how people can be so wrong but they are.

In summary: people will not get motivated if they aren't convinced that you have a solution that other people will agree with.

The biggest flaw in the assumptions people make is that we cannot encourage anyone to relax and enjoy themselves while there are people who are suffering due to joblessness or having a terrible, minimum-wage job. In other words people think we should fix economic problems, then reduce the working week.

The reality is that the correct order (when we have enough education and infrastructure/capital) is the opposite: we work less and economic distribution problems naturally fix themselves. But this requires addressing all the individual misunderstandings that people have which prevent them from voting or acting, which may include issues not listed above.

17 Comments

You are on to an essential truth here, which is that scarsity is not a problem in a fully devoloped society, with high worker productivity.

The function of the system is to create artificial scarsity as an incentive for people to sacrifice ever more and more of their time and energy for the staggering wealth of a tiny monority.

Thus, our system is not designed to distribute goods and services, but rather to prevent their distribution. Poor people are unempowered people, less likely to make demands or rebel, as a result of psychological abuse.

One of the questions is whether culture jamming (Yes Men) can help awareness in disingaged people, or is it counterproductive? Debate tonight at Jalopy Brooklyn about the issues related to this form of subversion, including neo burlesque. http://nycal.mayfirst.org/node/4969

It has the potential to make people think more critically. However, some people just interpret it as entertainment or unproductive activity, similar to how Anonymous is not taken seriously by much of the population.

Basically, while saying that "inequality is bad" is useful to some extent, the movement must eventually graduate to an effective solution like work conservation.

government spending lead to more welfare??? are you crazy.. they want to cut food stamps,, but they want to increase welfare to afganistan citizens. the government spends 2 BILLION a week in afganistan and now intends to continue to do so for another 15 yrs. get you facts straight

this agreement funds welfare , government free healthcare, foodstamps and infrastructure. in a country that hates democracy, and contanstly violates human rights this is where the money goes

The agreement also says the U.S. will help support Afghan economic development, health care programs, education and social initiatives, and stresses that the U.S. remains committed to defending human rights and the right of free speech.

(it's a tangent but keep in mind... the US still has bases in Korea and Japan! from over 50 years ago.)

They MIGHT cut food stamps, which many people depend on, which is why it's important to support work conservation so people can get jobs. Including people who work in bloated government agencies that don't want to fire people when there are no jobs in the private sector.

Job sharing. It is pretty well-known, and even practiced, outside of America.

Your first point has a greater counterpoint; that of vocational training. It is the norm in most western nations. There are dual branches of higher education: a student can choose to be college-bound or choose a vocation. The American public education system sets people up for failure just by requiring graduation to pursue a college degree.

As to the fourth point on your post; that of abuse of social safety net services: i would suggest that you get something other than fora to back that claim. In the case of me, no source will work. i know better. Abuse, (especially of food stamp benefits,) is the exceptional exception.

It might be possible to force people to accept more socialism, but I wouldn't recommend trying. More evidence, people want a smaller government (evidence in above thread) but they are aware that a larger government equals more growth:

Q59. Which do you think is the best way to promote economic growth in the U.S.? 1.Lower taxes on individuals and businesses, and pay for those tax cuts by spending on some government services and programs, or 2. Spend more on education and the nation’s infrastructure, and raise taxes on wealthy individuals and businesses to pay for that spending.
Lower taxes, cut spending 37
Spend more raise taxes 56

And just for the record (this forum isn't supposed to be candidates) people think Romney is dishonest but would still vote for him:

Q37. Do you think Mitt Romney says what he believes most of the time, or does he say what he thinks people want to hear?
4/13-17/12* [registered voters only]
What he believes 27
What people want to hear 62

Q27. Do you think Barack Obama says what he believes most of the time, or does he say what he thinks people want to hear?
Says what he believes 46
Says what people want 51

Q19. If the 2012 presidential election were being held today and the candidates were Barack Obama, the Democrat, and Mitt Romney, the Republican, would you vote for Barack Obama or Mitt Romney?
Obama 46
Romney 46

It used to be that lawyers and physicans weren't expected to go to college; they just went straight to law school or medical school.

But there's not much point in arguing about education. People can decide for themselves if they think high tuition and student loans are worth being able to get a minimum-wage job in the current economy. The idea of college will probably survive; the important thing right now is just creating more jobs.

And to graduate high school and to not have illegitimate babies. Both are key to not being poor. We also need to figure out how to get many of our poor motivated to leave the country; many of them are here illegally. Drop-outs from Mexico aren't brain surgeons, they're dish washers and valets and constitute a good chunk of now our poverty. Fight poverty: "Occupy" the border.